When Project Commitment Leads to Learning from Failure: The Roles of Perceived Shame and Personal Control
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although failure experience is regarded as the mother of success, scholars and entrepreneurs are prone to seek useful information from successful cases. In recent years, facing the extremely changing world, researchers gradually shift emphasis from successful experiences to failures. Previous studies mostly focused on the outcomes of learning from failure, while empirical researches toward antecedents and personal difference in the learning process are insufficient. In the current study, we build a model explore the relationship between project commitment and learning from failure, and test how emotion and cognition (attribution for failure) affect this process. The results show that project commitment is positively associated with learning from failure. Besides, shame and personal control attribution positively moderate the relationship between project commitment and learning from failure. Our study contributes to the empirical research of learning from failure, and the findings help managers apply them in practice.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it